








6.6| Average votes grouped by age and by sex: | |||||||
| Age: | 1-12 | 13-17 | 18-25 | 26-35 | 36-49 | 50+ | Total |
| Men: Votes: |
- 0 |
6.8 6 |
6.6 19 |
6.2 13 |
7.5 4 |
6 1 |
6.7 44 |
| Women: Votes: |
- 0 |
9 3 |
6.2 9 |
5.8 5 |
- 0 |
- 0 |
6.6 17 |
| Total: Votes: |
- 0 |
7.6 9 |
6.3 29 |
6.4 20 |
7.5 4 |
6 1 |
6.6 64 |
| Total includes those who didn't specify sex. | |||||||
Oh man, I like zombie movies, but for the record, zombies are mindless brain eating machines. They don't come out to put gas in your car. I liked the over the top blood, that was fun, but this was a stinker, brainless, flick. Mmm... braaains.
| 5/10 | rob_ontario18@ - 83 reviews 4.8.2011 - age: 26-35 |
Great zombie flick, Romero prove that he's still the master.
| 10/10 | cfh_trendkill@ - 487 reviews 4.1.2007 - age: 18-25 |
It was suppose to be a horror and have me scared but it did none of the above.
| 5/10 | ts459@ - first review 23.9.2006 - age: 18-25 |
Terrible acting. Silly storyline. Excessive (and I mean REALLY excessive) blood and gore... I loved it!
| 8/10 | god_smack9@ - 249 reviews 20.10.2005 - age: 18-25 |
[ATTENTION: This review reveals content of the movie.]
Good movie but... can somebody tell me the why the motivation of the character who stoles "dead rekoning" is money?!? In a Land of the dead what can money ever buy you? Especially when you leave one of the last city that is still standing. And come on, in the end why didn't they blew up that bridge with all the zombies on it? "don't, they are just looking for a place to go, just like us" Huh? They eat people alive, man! They are zombies! Kill them! That's the whole purpose of the movie! I tought that the "thinking" zombies were predictable after Bub in Day of the dead. But I like my zombies slow, dumb, decomposing and violent. It's a good zombie movie though, I'm a big fan of the Dead serie so even if I was a little turn off by the nonsense cited above, I'm going to buy it when it comes out on DVD. Go Romero!!
| 8/10 | the_gore_corporation@ - first review 14.8.2005 - age: 26-35 |
It was soo terrible, unless you like phony 80's flicks.
| 2/10 | robyns_way@ - 2 reviews 1.8.2005 - age: 18-25 |
After seeing the remake of dawn of the dead in the shopping mall and 28 days later, even Romero should've realize that a faster explosive zombie makes a more stressful nightmarish exiting movie. Also with all the digital special effects of today the possibilitys are endless. Now imagine if they could think on top of that? I was disappointed. I could've done a better movie then that.
| 6/10 | madkap@ - first review 23.7.2005 - age: 36-49 |
[ATTENTION: This review reveals content of the movie.]
It was a good movie best part when the zomby looked like it had no head then it did and it bit that guys arm never forget that I went and seen it to night. And I cant sleep now so go and see it now. [...]
| 8/10 | jaimie_on_fire99@ - first review 23.7.2005 - age: 13-17 |
AWESOME_ original and fantastic- definitely needs to be added to my collection- great horror flick--everyone needs to see it.
| 10/10 | flutterbyhigh@ - 3 reviews 21.7.2005 - age: 18-25 |
I'm a fan of the Dead series and didn't mind this movie. However, it wasn't spectacular and in my opinion it rates fourth in the series after Dawn, Night and then Day. The story was like Night in that it covered about two to three hours of time in the movie but personally I like the series better when a movie plays out over a longer period of time. The main thing that I didn't like was that nothing unexpected happened, it was all by the numbers and I'd hoped the series would have went out with more of a bang.
| 7/10 | parker_2@ - 296 reviews 20.7.2005 - age: 26-35 |
I read the comments online before I went to see it and most of them were negative. However, it didn't make me such disappointted, it was still a good movie, I like especially the actors. It's more violent than scary.
| 7/10 | namebg2000@ - 2 reviews 19.7.2005 - age: 18-25 |
Cool, great movie. Classic Gorge Romero movie little bit different but still as interesting as the others. Go watch it!
| 10/10 | ninja_cobra@ - 6 reviews 15.7.2005 - age: 18-25 |
I loved this movie... check out all of George Romero's "of the dead" movies including night of the living dead, dawn of the dead, day of the dead, and land of the dead.
| 10/10 | tygerseye016@ - first review 14.7.2005 - age: 13-17 |
It kicked a$$ im going to bring my freinds and watch it again.
| 10/10 | stixiscbh@ - first review 14.7.2005 - age: 13-17 |
Wow! Oh what a popouri of fun. George does it right in the end. This flick is pure gleeful genius. There is so much to see and squirm with here. Not only are there tonnes of flesh-eating shamblers, but the post-apocolyptic sets and fx are truly wonderous. The ambiance is creepy, although the cast is blighted with "ignore-it-and-it-will-go-away" characters. But who cares? The mall stuff Romero did in Dawn of the Dead is all here, the flawed military strongholds from Day otD, and there's even homage paid to favourite zombies with cameo appearances. Everything about this movie is so honest it hurts. The sarcastic cliches just keep comin'. Good for the kids, fair for a date, great for the parents and killer for the Zombie righteous!
| 9/10 | captainanarchy@ - first review 13.7.2005 - age: 26-35 |
For all you people complaining about the plot... it's a freak'n zombie movie - HELLO!?! Go see it if you like to jump out of you seat or like to laugh at blood & gore. The effects were fun, the movie was fun, go see it if you are into these types of things. If you are looking for a drama - you're at the wrong movie [...]!
| 7/10 | cogfu@ - 3 reviews 11.7.2005 - age: 26-35 |
[ATTENTION: This review reveals content of the movie.]
*spoiler alert* the movie was really good, it was great to see the good old George Romero at work, I just didn't like too much the way the zombies were being upgraded to being a little smarter... oh well, but stil the effects were great the story top-notch ( except for the intelligent zombie part ) but definitely a must see for any horror genre fan..
| 7/10 | cancer80@ - first review 10.7.2005 - age: 18-25 |
Freakin' awesome movie! Go see it before its too late! The acting was actually pretty good, I read some of the other reviews and they said "poor acting", but the acting was fine. The gore was awesome, the storyline was original and capturing, overall a pretty damm good movie. I admit there was SOME cheezy parts, like the ending, but it was still a good zombie movie, 3rd best romero movie, after the remake of NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD and the ORIGINAL DAWN OF THE DEAD. GO SEE IT NOW!
| 8/10 | some_jerk_from_canada@ - 25 reviews 9.7.2005 - age: 13-17 |
The blood and zombies were done very well in this movie. But the plot itself especially the ending needed some work. It is a typical Zombie movie, they try to take over the world. Except in this one... the zombies are not so stupid...
| 6/10 | jennifer_russo@ - 7 reviews 8.7.2005 - age: 18-25 |
By no means the best of the series, and in many respects Romero is past his heyday years of night, dawn, martin, season of the witch and other masterpieces. However, Dawn is a very competent entry into the horror genre. Filmgoers should consider it a treat to see this film. The political angle underlying this film are quite brilliant, and the FX outstanding. It is wonderful to see a return to prosthetics with only a moderate smattering of CGI. I am a massive Romero fan, and enjoyed this entry immensely. It is a shame that fully six minutes of FX and charecter development were cut, and therefore I am looking forward to seeing the uncut version on DVD. I also think that Romero's films take time to mellow, it is telling that Day of the Dead has become a massive cult film some twenty years after its release. Time will tell how this entry sits with the rest of the franchise. It was a pleasure to see an old master at work..
| 8/10 | jyramirez@ - first review 6.7.2005 - age: 26-35 |
Not bad movie but it seemed as if it was just a another "dawn of the dead" or "house of dead" so kinda gets old.
| 5/10 | damn_u_communists@ - first review 6.7.2005 - age: 13-17 |
Well, when you watch a zombie movie, I don't think that you go in expecting superb acting, with a seamless plot. I saw the more "classic" zombie flicks, such as Night of the Dead, Day of the Dead, and Dawn of the Dead, way before I saw Land of the Dead, and the stories are a whole lot better. I think that if they actually got into the story, like how the zombies came to be, these movies could be better. There is one, I can't remember what it is called, but it shows how the gas contained in this container full of corpses flows over the graveyards, stirring the dead. Also, they capture one zombie, and she tells them how eating flesh takes the pain from being dead away. Or how in Day of the Dead, the scientist has "trained" one to be civilized, not to crave human flesh. I wasn't expecting much, so, this was an alright movie.
| 5/10 | zish_123@ - 3 reviews 5.7.2005 - age: 13-17 |
I've got to say I was disappointed. Sure it had tons of gore that I love but that's not enough to hold this picture. I think the plot was really weak and it lacked scary scenes. There was only one part where people might jump (like my friend did) but I personally knew it was coming. Don't get me wrong, I'm not knocking horror films in general, just this one. I preferred the remake of Dawn of the Dead, I mean the beginning scene alone blows this picture out of the water. I'm sure you're planning on seeing it anyway, if you're a horror fan like me (even if it's total crap we can't help but watch) then you'll be able to form your own opinion.
| 6/10 | vickimcl@ - 2 reviews 5.7.2005 - age: 26-35 |
Run out of the theatre ten minutes before the ending, or you could just stay at home and watch tbs, it sucks that bad... f'real.
| 1/10 | bondgrrl_luv@ - 2 reviews 4.7.2005 - age: 18-25 |
Zombie films are dead, and it's kind of ironic that they keep coming back. These sorts of films are long, long passed on and a film like this is more like gas passing though the anus of the recently deceased then entertainment.
| 2/10 | stu_110@ - 3 reviews 2.7.2005 - age: 18-25 |
The worst movie I've seen in a very long time. No plot, no action, simply nothing to see. I kept waiting for somthing, but I guess after seeing '28 Days Later' and 'Shaun of the Dead'I was looking forward to another zombie movie.
| 1/10 | majidkmk@ - 2 reviews 2.7.2005 - age: 26-35 |
Terrible, plain and simple. Everything from the dialogue, to the acting was just awful. What really drove me crazy about the movie was it tried to make you sympathetic to the zombies. As if they don't eat people. Well guess what, they do eat people, so I am not going to shed a tear if a bunch of them are killed. Once again no explaination is offered for the existence of zombies, just that they happened to appear. Although I still suggest people see it, just for the experience.
| 1/10 | busogre@ - 3 reviews 2.7.2005 - age: 18-25 |
The greatest thing since sliced bread. Lots of blood and guts and gore. No great story line, no great acting, just lots of ridiculous gory fun. Lets face it, zombies are not exactly rocket scientists, so for those of you out there who are criticizing this film because it didnt challenge you mentally... THINK... HELLO... it's a zombie movie. Sit down, have a laugh and enjoy the mindnumbing action... lol.
| 10/10 | mpleau@ - 5 reviews 2.7.2005 |
Modern zombie it is, boring it's not, and far better then the lame remake of dawn of the dead which I never understood the purpose expect the mighty dollar. THis movie follows perfectly the first night of the living dead, the real 1978 dawn of the dead and the 1985 day of the day. In fact it blows them all away in the original dawn you add parts of the movie that where real slow and boring, this one has none. Its fast action past and amazing if you are a real fan of good horror movies not quick crap that comes out today then you will enjoy this amazing flick.
| 10/10 | wtainsider@ - 67 reviews 1.7.2005 - age: 26-35 |
A lot of people have commented that this movie has no plot. Well, I don't think people generally know that this film is a sequel to the Dead series. This film follows The Night, Dawn and Day of the Dead movies. Taken in that context this movie definitely has a plot and more importantly has something to say on a social level. If you didn't see the other movies in this series you may not, what am I saying, you will not enjoy this movie. Movies like this are not make for everyone. Just like the Blair Witch Project, I found that movie to be amazing but not for the general public. Land of the Dead is destined to be a cult classic like its previous films. Yes this movie has bad acting and it's chessy but that is all part of the fun. Watch it with an open mind.
| 10/10 | celestialace@ - 139 reviews 1.7.2005 - age: 36-49 |
This movie is simplay excellent... it was amazing how they made the zombies look so real... although there was no plot in the movie, I liked it... it was worth my time watching it, I saw it with my boyfriend, he was so scared holding my arm... therefore I loved the movie... it gave me the best memory.
| 9/10 | magic_mirrorz@ - first review 1.7.2005 - age: 13-17 |
What a terrible film. I was expecting a better performance from John Leguizamo. His acting a little off this time. I can't blame him though, his script was pretty weak. Dennis Hopper did deliver though, being the only character that was actually slightly believable. I walked out halfway through the film; I was laughing at all the fake zombies till that ponit anyway... The zombies really were not believable: they looked like bad actors under heavy make-up. I give all of my 4 points to all the zombie eating, tearing, bitting and all of the blood. This is the only entertainement that I consider actual entertainement in this movie.
| 4/10 | etaliano64@ - first review 29.6.2005 - age: 18-25 |
This is a neat twist on the traditional zombie movie. I enjoyed it, it had its cheesy moments but overall was pretty good. I think I liked the zombies better in the remake of Dawn of the Dead though.
| 8/10 | hugh_jass@ - 26 reviews 29.6.2005 - age: 26-35 |
Land of the Dead was spectacular. What I love the most about this movie is that George A. Romero doesnt mess around He knows we are coming to see a Zombie-Movie so he gets us right into it and involves us into some hard-core action from the start. The Special-Effects are GREAT!!! The plot and action scenes are very graphic putting in true essence what a Zombie Attack would look like. Considering the type of movie, the acting was adequate. One of the best Zombie Movies ever!!! A must see on the big-screen.
| 10/10 | jamesllef@ - 44 reviews 28.6.2005 - age: 18-25 |
1st thing's first, if you've only seen Snyder's remake of Dawn of the dead (2004), please understand that this is no way a sequel of this movie but a fourth chapter of the "Dead" series (Night, Dawn, Day, Land) You've have to see the other 3 to truly be able to comment on this one. As for Land, very good, I think most Romero fans will love it but I must admit that I was really looking foward to a conclusion. On the bright side, it is a continuation of the theory developped in Day of the dead, and the gore and makeup are hallucinating. The acting was ok, the script is a bit cheesy at times, but nonetheless a must see for Romero fans. Maybe Dusk will see the light of day.
| 7/10 | squirethomas@ - first review 28.6.2005 - age: 26-35 |
This is an excellent zombie movie, don't look for a complicated plot, don't look for great romance scene, it's a zombie movie, with gore, gun and bad ass gun freak. That's is what all about!
| 8/10 | daden3@ - 108 reviews 28.6.2005 - age: 26-35 |
The popcorn was alright, thats it, if you loved resident evil, or dawn of the dead you would be sadly dissapointed by this land of the dead, the reason I didnt give it 1 out of 10 is because some of the cool deaths and display of so much gore.
| 3/10 | flarme333@ - first review 28.6.2005 - age: 13-17 |
Disappointing, but still effective. I'd been waiting to see this movie since I had heard it was in production. This kind of anticipation can only mean one thing: The movie is supposed to suck. I went in, and although I was disappointed by the low budget (certainly there should be at least as much cash for this movie as there was for a remake of Dawn of the Dead, but nooo. There were some excellent creature effects, and some funny moments, but the small-scale low budget feel nagged at me the whole time. I missed the feeling of dread, and the feeling of hopelessness created by Dawn of the Dead and Day of the Dead, not to mention Night of the Living Dead. I'm going to have to watch this movie a few more times to see if I can pick some more up from the film, but some moments of cheese did make me feel sad for the chances of ever seeing another film in the Romero universe that I've enjoyed for so long.
| 6/10 | nofx_666@ - first review 28.6.2005 - age: 26-35 |
This was definitely the worst movie ever! What the hell was the plot of the movie? It's not even a horror movie!!! Go watch something else, I'm sure it will be way better than this one!
| 1/10 | m_big99@ - first review 27.6.2005 - age: 26-35 |
An exciting prospect of a movie falls short of its own potential. Over the years zombie-flick fans have come to expect one of three endings: 1)Zombies/Humans Win 2)Both Loose 3)Unresolved Somehow I was hoping that by this time we might have thought up more compelling story lines, but if you can look past that and enjoy a thriller, you'll be entertained enough. Enjoy!
| 6/10 | sithprobe@ - 12 reviews 27.6.2005 - age: 18-25 |
Romero has learned nothing about making movies since his last attempt in this series during the eighties. I love horror and I love gore but this movie was so lame. Bad story, bad characters, bad script just straight up bad. But just as good as the past ones. All he can deliver on is gore and that just doesnt cut it.
| 2/10 | ehdrian@ - first review 27.6.2005 - age: 18-25 |
What a horrible movie, please don't go watch it because it's a total waste of time. I'm not really into zombies, but I thought that Dawn of the Dead was pretty good. This one is just AWFUL!!!
| 1/10 | krayzie_lady@ - 224 reviews 27.6.2005 - age: 18-25 |
I will not give it a "10" because nothing is perfect BUT I do give it "9" because it's a must see for zombie film fans. George A. Romero is the creator of this genre of movies. I found that Land of the Dead was a good conclusion for the others chapters. I got a couple of spooks during the movie and even once, jumped out of my seat. I wasn't scared but had good heart-thumping fun. Two thumbs up to George! If you don't know George's films and are not a zombie movie fan - you're not worthy :))) *cheers*.
| 9/10 | smfrechette@ - 4 reviews 27.6.2005 - age: 26-35 |
It was awful. Waste of time and money. By the end we were waiting for it to end. Plot must have been made up by a child. Don't waste your time. See Batman. Way way way better.
| 3/10 | antimeta@ - 21 reviews 27.6.2005 - age: 18-25 |
I'm not a fan of zombie movies. But, as far as they go, this one was decent. A little gory at times, but what zombie movie isn't? I enjoyed how they didn't focus primarily on the zombies killing people, but more on the society that they were able to build which allowed them to co-exist with the zombies. Decent movie, but I would probably wait until the video comes out.
| 7/10 | melissaherman@ - 5 reviews 26.6.2005 - age: 18-25 |
[ATTENTION: This review reveals content of the movie.]
Disappointing. Rehash of Dawn, but not as good... instead of being holed up in a shopping mall, folks are in an ultralux high rise... why didn't they build better defenses than a chain link fence? Couple of good scares, but mostly I was bored.
| 5/10 | eatakiwi@ - first review 26.6.2005 - age: 36-49 |
The only reason I am giving this a 6 is because George Romero created the best horror film of all time in 1967, the original Night of the Living Dead, but that was in 1967, before we had seen the Excorcist and every other movie that came out where a Zombie had to eat a peanut butter sandwich or it would not survive. The only redeeming quality that this movie has is that it reminds us how zombie like and robotic we humans have become, especially when we are so awed by fireworks. The movie should have found more examples like that... perhaps the obsession for make-up or the right blue jeans. I guess Romero is reminding us that we should not ignore life and live it while we are alive and to leave the zombie like existence for the dead. This is too deep for my own good.
| 6/10 | riverdalekid@ - 199 reviews 25.6.2005 - age: 50+ |
Land of the dead was much less then I expected, I was dissapointed, and I'm one of the biggest zombie fans out there. Yes as usual, George A Romero had some hidden messages to send out to the viewers, but the story line was empty, completly vague. The script was a bit cheesy, and most of the actors sucked. I laugh more then I got the heebie jeebies, the only good factor of the movie was the gore, I mean they had some scenes in there that are completly disturbing, a zombies sticks his hand in a victims troat and the rest is up to u to find out, if u feel like spending your money to see some gruesome gore.
| 4/10 | streetsoxz@ - 29 reviews 25.6.2005 - age: 18-25 |
This movie was a good enough movie to see with your friends but might creep out younger children. This movie is a mixture between Resident Evil and Dawn of the Dead. If u like horror/action like RE then u would like this film. I would say the best part is almost at the end but it has a lot of gore which I find good but not all gore is good.
| 8/10 | matt_h713@ - 2 reviews 25.6.2005 - age: 18-25 |
Anyone that gives this movie less than a 7 is exactly everything Romero was trying to point out in the movie. It's freaking awesome and one of the best social commentaries I've seen in a long time. [...]
| 9/10 | paradoxal_paradox@ - first review 25.6.2005 - age: 18-25 |
Note: User reviews posted on this page are personal opinions of our readers. We are not responsible for their content.
Click to see more reviews:
[1-50]
[51-64]